Last week, Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) introduced legislation to prevent children from being trapped or eviscerated by swimming pool drains. The Senator named the legislation after Virginia Graeme Baker who drowned when suction from an outdoor spa drain cover pinned her underwater. Virginia Baker was seven at that time, and was the granddaughter of former Secretary of State James Baker.So, what happens when personal tragedy strikes a Republican family? Do they sue and look for deep pocketed defendants? You betcha. The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the trial court’s judgment to dismiss the case against defendants Poolservice Company and Hayward Pool Products, Inc. with prejudice. Their only connection to the tragedy was that they had performed routine cleaning and maintenance on the spa a few days before the drowning. The spa owners did not ask them to perform a safety inspection. Nevertheless, the Bakers sought to hold this business responsible for the death of their daughter. I wonder if the American Tort Reform Association will be holding a fundraiser for the pool cleaners?
Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act (Introduced in Senate)S 1771 IS
July 11, 2007
Mr. PRYOR (for himself, Mr. DODD, Mr. STEVENS, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. WARNER, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. MCCAIN, and Mr. COLEMAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
- Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
- This Act may be cited as the `Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
- Congress finds the following:
-
- (1) Of injury-related deaths, drowning is the second leading cause of death in children aged 1 to 14 in the United States.
-
- (2) In 2004, 761 children aged 14 and under died as a result of unintentional drowning.
-
- (3) Adult supervision at all aquatic venues is a critical safety factor in preventing children from drowning.
-
- (4) Research studies show that the installation and proper use of barriers or fencing, as well as additional layers of protection, could substantially reduce the number of childhood residential swimming pool drownings and near drownings.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
- In this Act:
-
- (1) ASME/ANSI- The term `ASME/ANSI’ as applied to a safety standard means such a standard that is accredited by the American National Standards Institute and published by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
-
- (2) BARRIER- The term `barrier’ includes a natural or constructed topographical feature that prevents unpermitted access by children to a swimming pool, and, with respect to a hot tub, a lockable cover.
-
- (3) COMMISSION- The term `Commission’ means the Consumer Product Safety Commission.
-
- (4) MAIN DRAIN- The term `main drain’ means a submerged suction outlet typically located at the bottom of a pool or spa to conduct water to a re-circulating pump.
-
- (5) SAFETY VACUUM RELEASE SYSTEM- The term `safety vacuum release system’ means a vacuum release system capable of providing vacuum release at a suction outlet caused by a high vacuum occurrence due to a suction outlet flow blockage.
-
- (6) SWIMMING POOL; SPA- The term `swimming pool’ or `spa’ means any outdoor or indoor structure intended for swimming or recreational bathing, including in-ground and above-ground structures, and includes hot tubs, spas, portable spas, and non-portable wading pools.
-
- (7) UNBLOCKABLE DRAIN- The term `unblockable drain’ means a drain of any size and shape that a human body cannot sufficiently block to create a suction entrapment hazard.
SEC. 4. FEDERAL SWIMMING POOL AND SPA DRAIN COVER STANDARD.
- (a) Consumer Product Safety Rule- The requirements described in subsection (b) shall be treated as a consumer product safety rule issued by the Consumer Product Safety Commission under the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2051 et seq.).
- (b) Drain Cover Standard- Effective 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, each swimming pool or spa drain cover manufactured, distributed, or entered into commerce in the United States shall conform to the entrapment protection standards of the ASME/ANSI A112.19.8 performance standard, or any successor standard regulating such swimming pool or drain cover.
SEC. 5. STATE SWIMMING POOL SAFETY GRANT PROGRAM.
- (a) In General- Subject to the availability of appropriations authorized by subsection (e), the Commission shall establish a grant program to provide assistance to eligible States.
- (b) Eligibility- To be eligible for a grant under the program, a State shall–
-
- (1) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Commission that it has a State statute, or that, after the date of enactment of this Act, it has enacted a statute, or amended an existing statute, and provides for the enforcement of, a law that–
-
-
- (A) except as provided in section 6(a)(1)(A)(i), applies to all swimming pools in the State; and
-
-
-
- (B) meets the minimum State law requirements of section 6; and
-
-
- (2) submit an application to the Commission at such time, in such form, and containing such additional information as the Commission may require.
- (c) Amount of Grant- The Commission shall determine the amount of a grant awarded under this Act, and shall consider–
-
- (1) the population and relative enforcement needs of each qualifying State; and
-
- (2) allocation of grant funds in a manner designed to provide the maximum benefit from the program in terms of protecting children from drowning or entrapment, and, in making that allocation, shall give priority to States that have not received a grant under this Act in a preceding fiscal year.
- (d) Use of Grant Funds- A State receiving a grant under this section shall use–
-
- (1) at least 50 percent of amounts made available to hire and train enforcement personnel for implementation and enforcement of standards under the State swimming pool and spa safety law; and
-
- (2) the remainder–
-
-
- (A) to educate pool construction and installation companies and pool service companies about the standards;
-
-
-
- (B) to educate pool owners, pool operators, and other members of the public about the standards under the swimming pool and spa safety law and about the prevention of drowning or entrapment of children using swimming pools and spas; and
< /li>
-
-
-
- (C) to defray administrative costs associated with such training and education programs.
-
- (e) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 $2,000,000 to carry out this section, such sums to remain available until expended.
SEC. 6. MINIMUM STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS.
- (a) In General-
-
- (1) SAFETY STANDARDS- A State meets the minimum State law requirements of this section if–
-
-
- (A) the State requires by statute–
-
-
-
-
- (i) the enclosure of all residential pools and spas by barriers to entry that will effectively prevent small children from gaining unsupervised and unfettered access to the pool or spa;
-
-
-
-
-
- (ii) that all pools and spas be equipped with devices and systems designed to prevent entrapment by pool or spa drains;
-
-
-
-
-
- (iii) that pools and spas built more than 1 year after the date of the enactment of such statute have–
-
-
-
-
-
-
- (I) more than 1 drain;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- (II) 1 or more unblockable drains; or
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- (III) no main drain; and
-
-
-
-
-
-
- (iv) every swimming pool and spa that has a main drain, other than an unblockable drain, be equipped with a drain cover that meets the consumer product safety standard established by section 4; and
-
-
-
-
- (B) the State meets such additional State law requirements for pools and spas as the Commission may establish after public notice and a 30-day public comment period.
-
-
- (2) USE OF MINIMUM STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS- The Commission–
-
-
- (A) shall use the minimum State law requirements under paragraph (1) solely for the purpose of determining the eligibility of a State for a grant under section 5 of this Act; and
-
-
-
- (B) may not enforce any requirement under paragraph (1) except for the purpose of determining the eligibility of a State for a grant under section 5 of this Act.
-
-
- (3) REQUIREMENTS TO REFLECT NATIONAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND COMMISSION GUIDELINES- In establishing minimum State law requirements under paragraph (1), the Commission shall–
-
-
- (A) consider current or revised national performance standards on pool and spa barrier protection and entrapment prevention; and
-
-
-
- (B) ensure that any such requirements are consistent with the guidelines contained in the Commission’s publication 362, entitled `Safety Barrier Guidelines for Home Pools’, the Commission’s publication entitled `Guidelines for Entrapment Hazards: Making Pools and Spas Safer’, and any other pool safety guidelines established by the Commission.
-
- (b) Standards- Nothing in this section prevents the Commission from promulgating standards regulating pool and spa safety or from relying on an applicable national performance standard.
- (c) Basic Access-Related Safety Devices and Equipment Requirements To Be Considered- In establishing minimum State law requirements for swimming pools and spas under subsection (a)(1), the Commission shall consider the following requirements:
-
- (1) COVERS- A safety pool cover.
-
- (2) GATES- A gate with direct access to the swimming pool that is equipped with a self-closing, self-latching device.
-
- (3) DOORS- Any door with direct access to the swimming pool that is equipped with an audible alert device or alarm which sounds when the door is opened.
-
- (4) POOL ALARM- A device designed to provide rapid detection of an entry into the water of a swimming pool or spa.
- (d) Entrapment, Entanglement, and Evisceration Prevention Standards To Be Required-
-
- (1) IN GENERAL- In establishing additional minimum State law requirements for swimming pools and spas under subsection (a)(1), the Commission shall require, at a minimum, 1 or more of the following (except for pools constructed without a single main drain):
-
-
- (A) SAFETY VACUUM RELEASE SYSTEM- A safety vacuum release system which ceases operation of the pump, reverses the circulation flow, or otherwise provides a vacuum release at a suction outlet when a blockage is detected, that has been tested by an independent third party and found to conform to ASME/ANSI standard A112.19.17 or ASTM standard F2387.
-
-
-
- (B) SUCTION-LIMITING VENT SYSTEM- A suction-limiting vent system with a tamper-resistant atmospheric opening.
-
-
-
- (C) GRAVITY DRAINAGE SYSTEM- A gravity drainage system that utilizes a collector tank.
-
-
-
- (D) AUTOMATIC PUMP SHUT-OFF SYSTEM- An automatic pump shut-off system.
-
-
-
- (E) DRAIN DISABLEMENT- A device or system that disables the drain.
-
-
-
- (F) OTHER SYSTEMS- Any other system determined by the Commission to be equally effective as, or better than, the systems described in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of this paragraph at preventing or eliminating the risk of injury or death associated with pool drainage systems.
-
-
- (2) APPLICABLE STANDARDS- Any device or system described in subparagraphs (B) through (E) of paragraph (1) shall meet the requirements of any ASME/ANSI or ASTM performance standard if there is such a standard for such a device or system, or any applicable consumer product safety standard.
SEC. 7. EDUCATION PROGRAM.
- (a) In General- The Commission shall establish and carry out an education program to inform the public of methods to prevent drowning and entrapment in swimming pools and spas. In carrying out the program, the Commission shall develop–
-
- (1) educational materials designed for pool manufacturers, pool service companies, and pool supply retail outlets;
-
- (2) educational materials designed for pool owners and operators; and
-
- (3) a national media campaign to promote awareness of pool and spa safety.
- (b) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Commission for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012 $5,000,000 to carry out the education program authorized by subsection (a).
SEC. 8. CPSC REPORT.
- Not later than 1 year after the last day of each fiscal year for which grants are made under section 5, the Commission shall submit to Congress a report evaluating the effectiveness of the grant program authorized by that section.
10 replies on “Republicans Against Tort Reform”
I vote republican and I think tort reform is a huge mistake. Tort law forces big business to do it right by protecting the consumer. Tort reform is code for “I am being bought and paid for by SCUMBAG insurance companies. Bottom line.
Tort reform ushers in more government intervention and economic artificialities — I understand we don’t like frivolous lawsuits, but to have artificial limits in the system allows bean counters and CEOs to determine what is risky, instead of taking into account actual damages.
And for everyone who rejoices when they get out of jury duty, think again — juries are formed by those who cannot get out of it, who are peeved by the process, confused by the law and procedures, and who are looking to stick it to big business.
There is a lot to reform here, but the short-sighted “tort reform” touted by Republicans is simply misdirected.
Accidental injuries chooses no one, whether Republican or Democrat. But the good thing is, something is being done about the law, to get it fixed where it needed fixing. That’s the real essence of good legislation, I think.
Whether Republican or Democrat the primordial consideration should be the welfare of the American public. If it’s a big mistake then amend the law. If not, then enforce the same.
Come to think of it, there is really no good or bad law; the issue, I think, lies in the implementation. We have enough tort laws to protect and help us claim damages from accident-related injuries. If reform is needed, then amendments should be introduced where it is necessary.
Tort reform has been a perennial issue. But legislation like this is like sunshine or rain, it falls on everyone whether Republican or Democrat.
I wish to not leave my name, as I don’t want to be flooded with people contacting me. Sorry.
Although the reason for the law is not bad, the way it was implemented is ridiculous. The December 2008 deadline to comply cannot be accomplished in the majority of situations, as the vendors (who are in this business) do not have approved products. It costs $40,000 to test each size and each style, so many of the vendors have decided to get out of the pool drain business and just continue to provide their drains for other purposes.
Also, this law was passed for not only single-drain pools (found in residential and motel/hotel pools), but also for commercial pools. Commercial pools have a different style of draining system anyway, and there are no known injuries or deaths with those drain systems. It is only the single-drain pools that have had incidences or deaths. As a result, there are thousands of commercial and municipal pools that will have to be changed at an enormous cost to the owners because the makers of the law did not bother to consult with qualified commercial pool engineers before passing the law.
This law is creating havoc since there are absolutely no products and no solutions and no time to comply by December 9, 2008. As far as I know there is one company that offers one small size main drain that may comply, but it is not yet approved. This size and style will not work for all pools.
This law needs to be overturned until a proper law can be passed, only after PROPER AND ACCURATE RESEARCH IS PERFORMED!
I think tort reform is illegitimate. It will be interesting to see what happens
Accidental injuries chooses no one, whether Republican or Democrat. But the good thing is, something is being done about the law, to get it fixed where it needed fixing. That’s the real essence of good legislation, I think.
You have a point. When an accident happens it does not happen to only Republicans or only Democrats. The laws that are passed will also have an effect on both parties too.